Community Announcements and News -
Announcements and News of interest to the RadioReference.com Community. All new threads posted here will be moderated by the administrators. Members are encouraged to post news and information here for the community.

As "smart" as smart phones are, pretty much every single one of them has an embedded GPS. Write a feature into the app that makes the streaming scanner app shut down (or incapable of starting up) when it detects the phones speed moving at a rate greater that, say 5-10 MPH as indicated by the GPS. Then, write a further condition in to the program that waits 10 minutes from the last detection of motion at that critical threshold before it allows use of the app, or a restart of the phone.

FWIW, if as far as the police are concerned the phone is a scanner-the phone DOES, according to the law count as a scanner. Maybe your interpretation of the law plus all of the hand clapping and happy thoughts in the world don't make it so, but 99.9% of the time police have the "I don't enforce the law, I *AM* the law" mentality. Good luck arguing to the contrary in a court of law.

Regardless, it's gonna cost you a LOT more than the price of a HAM ticket to fight in court. (Imagine lawyers, court fees, lost time from work, gas to drive to and from court, etc... you're looking at at LEAST $500 just to make it to the arraignment-and just TRY to recoup those costs. Ask anyone if I'm wrong... )

As far as stopping someone for only 5 over, I agree that is not right. Sometimes its worth fighting in court. When you know your right you know your right. Good luck with the court date.

I can say in Indiana, the scanner law is clear. To listen to Law Enforcement, 1. You have to be a Law Enforement Officer, 2. Ham radio license, 3. Have the Chief of Police, Sheriff, or Marshal type you up license to monitor. There are some other areas you can monitor. I may agree with you but the law is clear, it is what it is. Again good luck, as always you have every right to go to court.

Should it make it to court, it all depends on how the court chooses to interpret the scanner law. And should the charges be thrown out, rest assured there will be an attempt in the general assembly to amend the anti-scanner law to include the apps!

GTO_04

The problem there is that you don't even need the "Scanner" APPs to listen to police scanners on a cell phone. Any AUDIO APP (likeXiia Live) can listen to police feeds online. Granted they are not specifically designed for that purpose.

Ah yes you can "stream it youself" but does that make it ok?
Will the redirect the "guilty party" or the enabler away from the courts?'
Translation: Do you need the BULL****? if you are a scanner feed provider?
When you see a court document,at your door ,remember this post.

If Indiana had it ways they would prohibit the sale or manufacture of scanners altogether. No body could stream if they couldn't buy a scanner would be the idea behind that. lol What is funny about the whole thing is they still get caught otherwise they would never know they had the APP.

Bad news... Your simple solution doesn't address the issue. I'm not sure how you can equate someone going 5 over the limit (which any normal person does daily) with a criminal.

And the good news about a ham license is that afterwards the police department will be paying for all your legal fees plus a few extra thousand when you pursue a illegal seizure lawsuit.

No no no... that's not what I meant... I wasn't talking about going 5MPH over any arbitrary speed limit, that simply wouldn't work for the fact that there are multiple speed limits that one passes through in a given drive.

My solution, to clarify: any speed over stationary as percived by the phone, or any speed over what most people can walk at a brisk pace causes the ap to shut down. (Ideally, it could also lock the phone from making calls at all so that we're not at risk from the idiot multi-taskers, but that's a different thread for a different day). Further, if the phone loses its GPS signal, it shuts the ap down.

And again... if you're gonna try to recoup your legal fees from the system, good luck. You'll spend thousands of dollars in costs to find out there's that ugly little thing that makes overzealous officers (and their departments) immune from civil liability if Officer Doorkicker *thinks* he was legally in the right when he took your phone and cited you.

Think I'm wrong? Ask a lawyer-a *good* lawyer. One that's actually FAMILIAR with the system and how the police work it.

Again, good luck. I hope you have a HUGE bankroll to spend on your next 5-15 years in court standing on your principles.

ETA: And this is EXACTLY the kind of behavior that will lead to backroom deals between police unions and legislators that will lead to a TOTAL BAN on mobile cell phone use all together-the laws WILL be written to keep pace with this technology, and it will have sweeping impacts. Either that, or there will be total system wide encryption to insure "officer safety", despite any and all expenses. One or the other (or both) WILL happen as these cases become more prevalent.

I see what you're saying now. App developers have no reason to incorporate that... Very few states have laws that would apply to cellphones, as we see the Indiana law doesn't. So there's no real need. Anyone using an app to break the law 1) is stupid and 2) will get caught so 3) have it taken care of. Anyone else driving down the road with the app playing will never be noticed by anyone outside their car.

I see what you're saying now. App developers have no reason to incorporate that... Very few states have laws that would apply to cellphones, as we see the Indiana law doesn't. So there's no real need. Anyone using an app to break the law 1) is stupid and 2) will get caught so 3) have it taken care of. Anyone else driving down the road with the app playing will never be noticed by anyone outside their car.

The law, as it's applied, has nothing to do with cell phones-it has to do with APS THAT MAKE THE CELL PHONE INTO A SCANNER. There are SEVERAL states that have laws regarding this.

The cell phone as several people have already stated is a "radio device" capable of "recieving police communications".

But, you clearly refuse to see the light in the matter. Good luck in court. Hopefully the judge has as much an appreciation of semantics as you seem to think you have.

(ETA: )And to muddy the waters even FURTHER, smart phones, I'm sure, can track what area code they're in-it should be a cinch for an app developer to write in a line or two of code that looks to see which state they're in at the time and cross-check it against states that allow mobile scanners. You're in a zone without approval, too bad-no app.

The law, as it's applied, has nothing to do with cell phones-it has to do with APS THAT MAKE THE CELL PHONE INTO A SCANNER. There are SEVERAL states that have laws regarding this.

If you've followed along, you will have noted that there are phone numbers you can call with 24/7 streaming audio of police radio transmissions. So if the app makes it a scanner, then the ability to make calls would also make your phone a scanner. Using your "logic" then, any cellphone is also a scanner, and therefore illegal to carry in many states.

Where are the semantics exactly? While you're at it, please show me the laws specifically regarding smartphone apps.

Quote:

(ETA: )And to muddy the waters even FURTHER, smart phones, I'm sure, can track what area code they're in-it should be a cinch for an app developer to write in a line or two of code that looks to see which state they're in at the time and cross-check it against states that allow mobile scanners. You're in a zone without approval, too bad-no app.

Why would an app developer care? He's not streaming the audio, and he's not playing it in an illegal state. And you still haven't "proven" that it's illegal anyways. If it was, would the charges have been dropped in this case? It was actually used during a crime, yet the charge was put away.

And for those that say that it wouldn't apply to them because its not in their area. I know for a fact that you can email the site owner and within minutes get a code to enter on a number to listen to your local feed by if one is available. EXACTLY the same audio as if you were using a smartphone app.

While the cell phone could be defined as a radio, wouldn't something like this fall under a similar law as ham radio users using a radio from a remote location?

Since you could possibly be charged for simply having the app on your phone, what about having the phone number for one of these "dial-in" scanners in your contact list?

The fact that the prosecutor in the case this thread started because of decided to DROP the charge and not prosecute it says MOUNTAINS about this "law" I am sure your contacts list is 100% safe from scrutiny by the police with regards to mobile scanner use.

Also, until this "law" is ammended to clarify points that are arguable or a successful prosecution of one has occurred, I doubt you will see many people charged under that code. Especially if it is the only charge they are filing.

Please deliver me from this world! We have people on here suggesting that prosecutors take action against streaming audio providers like Radio Reference. Others suggest, "ingenious", ideas to keep the apps from working on a mobile cell phone involving motion so that no one can enjoy them. Yeesh!

This reminds me of elementary school, particularly first grade. Some of you remember when we were going out on the playground for the first time and the teacher said we needed rules and solicited ideas from the kids. In addition to the normal ones about no fighting, no pushing, no throwing rocks, and such; there was always one in the class who would come up with something like, "don't look at the sun", "don't play to hard" (don't enjoy yourself too much), or something equally silly. They just had to have an, "idea", registered so they came up with one, even if it wasn't so bright. At Christmas, when the teacher solicited rules for the Christmas party, in addition to the ones regarding drawing names for presents, maximum cost of presents, and the like; one of those same students would always come up with something like, "if you have a gift you want to give to a close personal friend, do it after school because it might upset another kid who didn't get the personal gift", or "don't wrap the present up where it is too hard for the kid who gets it to open it". Again, they couldn't come up with something good, maybe because any good ideas had really already been discussed and there were no more, so they came up with something unnecessary and silly.

I think some of the posters on here are those kids from elementary school. If you are quaking in your shoes about the possibility of getting busted for monitoring LE stuff, DON'T. If you really fear that owning a so-called, "Smart Phone" (whether an app is installed or not), will give the cops cause to haul you in, then DON'T. If you fear that having any radio or phone device in your possession will get you hauled in, because anything from a scanner, to a CB, to a GMRS radio, to your car's AM-FM radio can be used to listen to police calls that are rebroadcast over them, then yank them out of your car and drive around as disconnected from the world as possible. Be sure to keep your windows rolled up and hum or sing loudly to yourself just in case a cop pulls up beside you at a traffic light and his radio is turned up loudly enough that you can hear it. Just PLEASE, don't add to the burdens of the rest of us out here in the real world by giving the powers-that-be ideas. You see, governments thrive on stupid ideas and it worries me that they will indeed use technology to add to the already-too-many restrictions we live with on a daily basis, as it is.

The fact that the prosecutor in the case this thread started because of decided to DROP the charge and not prosecute it says MOUNTAINS about this "law"

No it doesn't. Take it from me, a person who has sit in court many many many times for my profession and there are a multiude of reason's why a ADA/DA would drop the charge's. Unless you were there to hear it you don't know the reason.

I will say this again as people still want to contine to argue about it. Since this is becoming national news, states will start changing their laws to outlaw these apps. And it's because of stuff like this that system admin's are encrpyting their systems.

Notice it says "arrestees" -- as in "you were already arrested on something else." That doesn't support your earlier claim that police were grabbing phones from people on the streets and looking for the scanner app. Glad you finally found independent verification of what we have been trying to tell you. Now do you believe finally?